Posts Tagged David Letterman

And that’s why we don’t talk to reporters

September 26, 2008 at 1:33 am · Filed under foreign affairs, Politics ·Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sarah Palin’s disastrous interview with CBS anchor Katie Couric proved Campbell Brown quite wrong. McCain isn’t shielding Palin from press scrutiny because she is a woman; he is shielding her from press scrutiny because she handles it no better than he does.  Clive Crook at the Financial Times had this to say:

Was this the same Palin who gave the convention speech – or even the less-than-stunning Palin of the Charles Gibson interview? She was simply awful. In response to straightforward questions, she was scared, rambling, incoherent, and at times completely unintelligible. She looked stupid. She gave her critics everything they could have wished.

The two part interview revealed several points of weakness:

1. Palin had no answer to Couric’s questions about revelations that McCain campaign manager Rick Davis’ firm (in which he continues to hold an interest, pointed out Couric) has continued to receive $15,000/month payments from Freddie Mac until last month.  When Couric pressed on whether Davis’ interest in the firm isn’t a clear conflict of interest, Palin was literally at a loss for words.

2. When asked by Couric for a specific example of how John McCain had pushed for more adequate regulation of Wall Street, Palin stumbled, and when Couric pressed the point for a third time, Palin had to admit she couldn’t think of an example, but would “try to find one and bring it to ya.”


3. Couric gave the governor another shot to frame her foreign policy credentials vis a vis Russia.  Palin was wobbly, trying to finish out a sentence describing a maritime border with Russia and wandered into talking about the land border with Canada.  As Putin rears his head and comes into the airspace of the United States of America, where do you think they go?”  And it gets worse, you can view it below, in part two of the interview.


4. Couric asked Palin her opinion about the bailout package under negotiation in Congress this week, and whether the country could face another Great Depression if something isn’t passed. Rather than sounding a reassuring and confident note, Palin took the bait, and said that yes, we could be headed for one.  Worse, though is that she was completely incoherent – despite repeatedly looking down toward, presumably, her notes, when defining why a bailout needs to be passed.  I would paste the text here but CBS didn’t provide it; you have to watch the clip.  Her answer begins at 2:20 minutes in the Part II interview.  Then between 4:00 and 4:45 minutes she seems unable to decide whether homebuyers should bear any responsbility for home foreclosures.

5. Katie Couric asked Palin about when U.S. efforts to promote democracy backfire, such as when Hamas won control of the Palestinian government several years ago.  Palin did not seem to understand the question, and just rambled on about how important it is to promote those who seek democracy.   Not surprisingly, her diplomatic approach to Israel and Iran comes down to not secondguessing “the good guys” in “their fight” against “the bad guys.”  Time to take cover, folks.

5. Palin’s fumbles on the economic crisis led John McCain to skip a taping with David Letterman and sit down with Katie Couric, in which he avoided referring to a Great Depression but rather warned of consequences “of the utmost seriousness” if action is not taken.  Then, David Letterman skewered McCain for begging off the show to rush back to Washington, and showed live tape of McCain getting powdered for the Couric interview.

I think it’s clear that even if John McCain and Sarah Palin take any more questions from the press over the next forty days, they surely won’t take any more of them from Katie Couric.
But wait- I left out one other important video that the unholy media dug up this week.  A visiting pastor visits Palin’s church (during her gubernatorial campaign) and prays against witchcraft, and for, among other things, that God should take over the media, our schools, the financial system, our government and politics. He prays for her success, and that church members will involve themselves in her campaign.

Leave a Comment

Will they, or won’t they debate?

September 25, 2008 at 2:33 pm · Filed under domestic policy, Economy, foreign affairs, Politics ·Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Yesterday, John McCain suddenly announced he would be suspending his campaign, and returning to Washington to help broker agreement on the rescue/bailout package that congressional leaders and Secretary Paulson have been negotiating.  He also called to cancel tomorrow night’s debate.

David Letterman was miffed that McCain blew off a scheduled appearance on his show last night, in his “race to the airport,” but sat for an interview with Katie Couric instead.  So, Letterman rolled live footage of McCain getting his face powdered before the interview.  “Hey, I’ve got a question for you,” Letterman yelled at the onscreen image of McCain.  “Need a ride to the airport?!”

For his part, Barack Obama wasn’t having any of it.

“With respect to the debates, it’s my belief that this is exactly the time when the American people need to hear from the person who, in approximately 40 days, will be responsible for dealing with this mess. And I think that it is going to be part of the president’s job to deal with more than one thing at once . . .”

“I think there’s no reason why we can’t be constructive in helping to solve this problem and also tell the American people what we believe and where we stand … So in my mind, actually, it’s more important than ever that we present ourselves to the American people and try to describe where we want to take the country and where we want to take the economy.”

President Bush went on the air last night to calm us all, and to explain why we won’t be able to get a car, home or school loan next year, even with a great credit record, if we don’t act now to stabilize our capital markets.  He’s right, actually.  But George Bush isn’t exactly someone most Americans feel confident in.

We are looking to the guy who, just over a month, is going to inherit this mess.  So, as Obama said, there is no better time to hold a nationally televised debate than now.

Senator Lindsey Graham, McCain’s debate negotiations pointman, had this to say yesterday: “We need a solution on this crisis more than we need a foreign policy debate.”  Oh, really?  I wonder what Mr. Graham had to say today, after Pakistani and American troops exchanged fire — with eachother — and Pakistan’s Prime Minister had this to say:

“We will not tolerate any act against our sovereignty and integrity in the name of the war against terrorism,” Pakistan’s prime minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani, told reporters on Wednesday. “We are fighting extremism and terror not for any other country, but our own country.”

And that’s not all.  Terrorist violence in Pakistan has been escalating,  and there are now reports that a “grim” new National Intelligence Estimate on the situation in Afghanistan is ready, but that it won’t be released until after the election.  Iran’s nuclear development activities aren’t on hold while Washington works to rescue Wall Street.  The North Korea deal still hangs precariously on the cliff of failure.  A new Israeli Prime Minister may or may not be able to hold a coalition government together to continue peace talks with the Palestinians, and with the Syrians.  Hugo Chavez gallivants off to see his new BFFs in Moscow every other month.  But hey, no biggie.  All that stuff can wait.

I agree with Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (never one to mince words) that McCain’s announcement was “the longest Hail Mary pass in the history of football or Marys.”  The negotiations include Senate and House leadership and the Senate Banking and House Financial Services committes.  John McCain will not be in the room at 10:00am this morning when the negotiators hammer out their remaining differences.  In fact, the negotiators will have to take a break from the actual business of negotiating to troop over to the White House and have a meaningless photo op with the President.  The president has little juice left for effective arm-twisting, and whatever lines in the sand he wants to express, are obviously represented for him by Hank Paulson.  The only thing that meeting could be good for is if Congressional leaders and Paulson have reached an agreement by the time they all arrive at the White House, and President Bush announces the deal when the “meeting” wraps.

At this stage, the arms that still need twisting are those members who don’t want the government, and thus the taxpayers, to have to front this money for Wall Street.  They are understandably angry, but they need to realize that things will only get far worse if we don’t act to stabilize the markets.  So the parameters really are around how much money truly needs to be fronted (Paulson is erring on the side of as much as he can have the authority to move around), what measures will be taken to penalize those at fault (limiting CEO pay, for example), what measures can be put in place to increase the likelihood and the amount of profit the taxpayer, and not the bailed out companies, will get later for fronting the money now, and, is there anything Congress can do to prevent more homes from being foreclosed (I have read about a proposal to allow bankruptcy judges to reset mortgage terms, but I doubt that would fly).

If John McCain wants to be useful, he should march over to Jeb Henslaring’s (R-TX) office and twist his arm.  “Jeb, I don’t like this anymore than you do,” he should say.  “But I need the caucus with me on this one.  I don’t want to be responsible for the deal failing, and Reid and Pelosi are threatening not to move if the GOP sits back on this one.  It sure would be nice to all buck the president, vote no and let the Democrats pass a socialist government takeover of Wall Street, but Harry and Nancy aren’t going for it.  So, I’ve come back to save the deal, right?  Seriously, I need you to shut up and fall in line.  You know, as if I were the leader of the Party now and I carried some real sway with you jerks?”

Comments (3)